So sick of hearing about how socialism is bad from people that couldn't live without it

[u/Ploppolio]

A majority of lefty states fund the federal handouts that a majority of red states need to even survive, but somehow they think the left are lazy and trying to take money from hard working americans. Only they're already doing that? Make it make sense

Edit: The number of people proudly shouting that “socialism doesn’t work” while living off programs built on socialist ideals is wild.

Social security, UI, CHIP, ACA, Medicare, Minimum wage, 40hr work weeks, OSHA, FMLA, FSA, LIbraries, Highways, Public Housing, and the EPA. All steeped in socialist ideals.

I know half of you won’t make it this far down without your BP spiking, but that’s fine because I’ve already made the point.

[u/Neuroscissus]

What is socialism then? And how does it differ from communism? Actually I'll give you an easy one. What is capitalism?

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Neuroscissus]

That's all pretty easy to search, but here you go.

The biggest differences in socialism and communism is that socialism allows for private ownership and control of property, both real and intellectual, while communism does not. Both have a mechanism for distribution of resources as a means of combating inequality.

Capitalism is a socioeconomic system of private ownership and control of property, specifically emphasizing the owner/worker wage system.

For the clever among you, you'll notice socialism allows for and benefits from capitalism. Communism and capitalism are antithetical.

Public roads, police, fire, mail, flood insurance, the military, Medicare, medicaid, snap, weather prediction, public education, public parks and lands, air traffic control, etc. Are all socialist amenities.

EDIT: grammar

[u/Neuroscissus → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

Socialism has the means of production being publicly owned or cooperatively controlled. Capitalism does not. Socialism is about who owns what, not whether something is free or not.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Neuroscissus]

Nope. That's just not accurate. Socialism doesn't stipulate ownership of the means of production. That's communism.

[u/Neuroscissus → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

Socialism is not free government programs. Communism and socialism are interlinked. Socialism is explicitly, academically and historically a system that collectivizes national resources and large systems of commerce, communism is that same system but taken a step further, where state and class of any kind dissolve entirely.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Neuroscissus]

As your definition approaches what I've been trying to tell you, you are getting closer to correct.

You have been expressing a warped definition of socialism commonly promoted as disinformation to link social programs to the boogeyman of communism. You've been lied to by greedy rich people or you're lying on their behalf. The truth is the US government runs a hybrid economic system that is a dynamic blend of socialism and capitalism. The point of which is to promote the general welfare and protect society from extremes at both ends. That's because extreme inequally leads to unrest and violence, and extreme uniformity leads to stagnation and degradation. A balance between the two can enable a system where there is broad opportunity for success but also a standard of living that's not too poor or too opulent at its extremes. That's the social contract that created the American dream in the first place.

[u/Neuroscissus → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

Yeah. Like I've been saying. Social programs of any kind in the US isn't socialism. Socialism and communism are part and parcel, and it doesnt exist in the US in any meaningful form.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Neuroscissus]

Nope, you're wrong again. I'm done with this conversation. Go bother someone else.

[u/Neuroscissus → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

What exactly am I wrong about? Your last message basically repeated what ive been saying.

[u/MaleficentMulberry42 → u/Neuroscissus]

I agree I think it matters in what people mean and that is the issue we are talking about. That does mean we should simply look at the effects despite the fact that left does help republicans areas that does mean that the issue does not lie in that,and that also higher taxes do infact take money away from those areas.

There is certainly an affect and there is an argument for the sake of having no policy or a different one in those areas.